[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-id: <745F9F90-6F43-4DA1-92B7-0AC09E07981C@sun.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 09:41:02 -0800
From: Andreas Dilger <adilger@....com>
To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@...hat.com>
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, tytso@....edu
Subject: Re: norecovery option for ext3
On 2009-11-20, at 07:46, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> Jan Kara wrote:
>> I've tried to test noload/norecovery option of ext3 and I've found
>> it simply does not work. The filesystem does not even mount.
>> Given that nobody used the option (OK, some googling shows that
>> somebody tried to use it in *2.4.9* kernel and it didn't work even
>> there - Stephen Tweedie comments that it's an obsolete option meant
>> for use during fs development) and seeing how badly corrupted the
>> filesystem is when you don't replay the journal, I'd just remove
>> the option. Any opinions?
>
> Oh, sigh. Sorry, didn't actually, er, test it, since I was just
> adding an alias for the option... bleah.
>
> I think we should fix it; there are cases when you may want to mount
> that way, I think - for example, otherwise there is no way at all to
> mounta block device which is marked readonly...
Won't this require implementing "no journal" mode for ext3? Seems
like a lot of effort, when ext4 does the same thing (i.e. they could
just mount the filesystem "-t ext4 -o norecovery" if they really,
really need to do that).
Cheers, Andreas
--
Andreas Dilger
Sr. Staff Engineer, Lustre Group
Sun Microsystems of Canada, Inc.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists